ICO/IDO from France: Complete Legal Framework 2025
Introduction: Raising Funds Through Tokens
From the Wild West of 2017 to a structured European regulatory framework.
ICOs (Initial Coin Offerings) and IDOs (Initial DEX Offerings) have revolutionized the funding of blockchain projects. Since the boom of 2017, the sector has matured considerably, moving from an unregulated "Wild West" to an environment governed by European (MiCA) and national legislation.
In 2025, launching a token fundraise from France remains possible, but requires rigorous preparation to comply with the regulatory framework and protect both project founders and investors.
This guide details the steps, obligations, and best practices for structuring a compliant ICO or IDO under French and European law.
Table of Contents
- ICO, IEO, IDO: Definitions
- French Pre-MiCA Framework
- MiCA Impact on ICOs
- Token Qualification
- Legal Structuring
- Tax Aspects
- KYC/AML: Obligations
- Marketing and Communication
- Launchpads and IDOs
- Launch Checklist
- FAQ
1. ICO, IEO, IDO: Definitions
Understanding the different crypto-asset fundraising models.
1.1 Evolution of Models
| Type | Description | Intermediary | Period |
|---|---|---|---|
| ICO | Direct sale by the project | None | 2014-2018 |
| IEO | Sale via a centralized exchange | Exchange (Binance, etc.) | 2019-2021 |
| IDO | Sale via a DEX/launchpad | Decentralized launchpad | 2020-present |
| INO | Initial NFT Offering | Variable | 2021-present |
| LBP | Liquidity Bootstrapping Pool | Balancer, Copper | 2021-present |
1.2 ICO: Initial Coin Offering
Principle:
- The project issues tokens
- Investors purchase with crypto (ETH, BTC) or fiat
- Tokens delivered immediately or after a vesting period
Advantages:
- Full control by the project
- No intermediary fees
- Maximum flexibility
Disadvantages:
- Trust must be established
- Direct regulatory responsibility
- Risk of fraud (rug pulls)
1.3 IEO: Initial Exchange Offering
Principle:
- The exchange manages the sale
- Due diligence on the project
- Token listed on the exchange after the IEO
Advantages:
- Exchange credibility
- Existing user base
- Immediate liquidity
Disadvantages:
- High fees (15-30% of funds raised)
- Dependence on the exchange
- Strict selection process
1.4 IDO: Initial DEX Offering
Principle:
- Sale via a decentralized launchpad
- Smart contracts automate the process
- Liquidity provided to the associated DEX
Advantages:
- Decentralization (no single point of failure)
- Global access
- Immediate liquidity
Disadvantages:
- Technical complexity
- Smart contract risk
- Less due diligence
2. French Pre-MiCA Framework
The optional AMF visa paved the way but remains rarely used.
2.1 The PACTE Law and the Optional Visa
The PACTE law (2019) created an optional AMF visa for ICOs:
"Any issuer who carries out or wishes to carry out a public offering of tokens may apply for a visa from the Autorite des marches financiers (AMF, the French Financial Markets Authority)."
Source: Article L.552-4 of the Code monetaire et financier (French Monetary and Financial Code)
2.2 Visa Conditions
| Condition | Requirement |
|---|---|
| Information document | Compliant white paper (regulated content) |
| Issuing entity | Legal entity established in France |
| Escrow mechanism | Fund protection during the offering |
| Monitoring mechanism | Post-ICO reporting |
| Security mechanism | Protection of collected assets |
2.3 Procedure and Timelines
| Step | Indicative Timeline |
|---|---|
| File submission | - |
| AMF review | 20 working days |
| Questions and answers | Variable (1-3 months) |
| Decision | Upon receipt of complete answers |
| Typical total | 2-4 months |
2.4 Visa Statistics
| Year | Visas Issued | Amounts Raised |
|---|---|---|
| 2019 | 2 | ~EUR15M |
| 2020 | 1 | ~EUR3M |
| 2021 | 3 | ~EUR50M |
| 2022-2024 | Rare | Variable |
Observation: The AMF visa is rarely used because:
- The procedure is lengthy and costly
- It is optional (not mandatory)
- Competition from other jurisdictions
2.5 Advantages of the Visa
| Advantage | Detail |
|---|---|
| Credibility | Validation by the regulatory authority |
| Banking access | Facilitates banking relationships |
| Communication | Can be highlighted in marketing |
| Legal protection | Presumption of good faith |
3. MiCA Impact on ICOs
Since December 2024, the MiCA white paper has become mandatory.
3.1 The New Framework (2024-2025)
The MiCA regulation (Markets in Crypto-Assets) harmonizes rules at the European level:
"Issuers of crypto-assets other than asset-referenced tokens or e-money tokens shall draw up, notify, and publish a white paper [...] before any offer to the public."
Source: Regulation (EU) 2023/1114, Article 4
3.2 MiCA Obligations for ICOs
| Obligation | Detail | Effective Date |
|---|---|---|
| White paper | Standardized content, notified to authority | December 30, 2024 |
| Liability | Issuer liable for content | Same |
| Right of withdrawal | 14 days for retail investors | Same |
| Notification | To the national authority (AMF) | Same |
| Fair communication | Marketing consistent with white paper | Same |
3.3 Mandatory White Paper Content Under MiCA
| Section | Required Content |
|---|---|
| Issuer information | Identity, registered office, contacts, history |
| Project | Description, objectives, roadmap |
| Token | Characteristics, attached rights, technology |
| Risks | Warnings, risk factors |
| Offering | Terms, price, schedule |
| Use of funds | Destination of raised capital |
3.4 Difference Between AMF Visa and MiCA Notification
| Aspect | AMF Visa (Pre-MiCA) | MiCA Notification |
|---|---|---|
| Nature | Optional | Mandatory |
| Validation | Substantive review | Notification (no approval) |
| Timeline | 2-4 months | 20 days for objection |
| Cost | AMF fees + legal counsel | Lower |
| Passport | No | Yes (entire EU) |
4. Token Qualification
Utility or security: this distinction determines your entire regulatory framework.
4.1 The Qualification Challenge
The legal qualification of the token determines:
- Applicable regulatory obligations
- Tax regime
- Sales restrictions
4.2 Types of Tokens
| Type | Characteristics | Regulation |
|---|---|---|
| Utility token | Access to a service, no yield | MiCA (lighter) |
| Security token | Financial rights (dividends, equity share) | MiCA + MiFID II |
| Payment token | Means of payment | MiCA |
| Stablecoin | Pegged to a value | MiCA (enhanced) |
| NFT | Unique, non-fungible | Outside MiCA (with exceptions) |
4.3 Qualification Test
| Criterion | Utility | Security |
|---|---|---|
| Grants access to a service | Yes | No |
| Promise of yield | No | Yes |
| Economic voting rights | No | Yes |
| Share of profits | No | Yes |
| Valuation linked to project | Caution | Yes |
4.4 Reclassification Risk
Warning signals:
- Marketing focused on investment ("yield", "appreciation")
- Buyback or dividend promises
- Comparison with equities
- Holder passivity (no actual use)
Consequences of reclassification as a security:
- Prospectus obligation (very costly)
- Investment service provider authorization required
- Marketing restrictions
- Potential sanctions
4.5 Recommended Structuring
To maintain "utility token" status:
- Real utility within the protocol/service
- No promise of financial return
- Governance as a primary function (if applicable)
- Clear documentation of the utility nature
- Vesting to discourage pure speculation
5. Legal Structuring
French SAS, Swiss foundation, or offshore structure: making the right choice.
5.1 Choice of Issuing Entity
| Structure | Advantages | Disadvantages | Recommended If |
|---|---|---|---|
| French SAS | Credibility, AMF visa possible | Taxation, formalism | French team, visa desired |
| Swiss Foundation | Reputation, neutrality | Cost, supervision | International project |
| Cayman Foundation | Flexibility, offshore | Image, complexity | Large-scale projects |
| BVI Company | Simple, tax-efficient | Image | International projects |
| Dutch Stichting | Simple, EU-based | Less well-known | Alternative to Switzerland |
5.2 SAFT: Simple Agreement for Future Tokens
The SAFT is a pre-token investment contract:
Principle:
- Investors pay now
- Tokens delivered later (at launch)
- Contract between investors and issuer
Advantages:
- Raises funds before the token exists
- Reserved for sophisticated investors
- Fewer regulatory constraints
Caution: The SAFT may be classified as a security in certain jurisdictions.
5.3 Tokenomics and Vesting
Best practices:
| Category | Typical Allocation | Vesting |
|---|---|---|
| Team | 15-20% | 4 years, 1-year cliff |
| Investors | 15-25% | 1-2 years |
| Treasury/DAO | 20-30% | Progressive unlock |
| Ecosystem/Rewards | 20-30% | Over project duration |
| Public sale | 10-20% | Often immediate or short |
5.4 Cap Table and Governance
Required documentation:
- Detailed tokenomics
- Rights of each holder category
- Governance mechanisms
- Modification procedures
6. Tax Aspects
Funds raised are generally subject to corporate income tax.
6.1 Issuer Taxation
| Event | Tax Treatment |
|---|---|
| Funds raised | Revenue (turnover or exceptional income) |
| Tokens issued | No expense (creation) |
| Tokens held in treasury | Inventory to be valued |
Important: Funds raised are generally subject to corporate income tax (impot sur les societes, or IS, in France).
6.2 VAT on Token Sales
| Token Type | VAT |
|---|---|
| Utility token | Exempt (CJEU Hedqvist ruling, treated as a means of payment) |
| Security token | Exempt (financial transaction) |
| Access to service | Potentially applicable |
6.3 Founder Taxation
| Event | Treatment |
|---|---|
| Token attribution | Potential benefit in kind (valuation question) |
| Token sale | Capital gain (flat tax 30% or BNC/BIC professional income regime) |
| Salary in tokens | Employment income (valued at date of payment) |
Complexity: The tax treatment for founders receiving tokens is poorly defined in French law. Consult a tax advisor.
7. KYC/AML: Obligations
Investor identification and anti-money laundering compliance are mandatory.
7.1 AML/CFT Obligations
The issuer must implement anti-money laundering procedures (known in French law as LCB-FT, lutte contre le blanchiment et le financement du terrorisme):
| Obligation | Detail |
|---|---|
| Identification | KYC for all investors |
| Verification | Document checks |
| Vigilance | Detection of suspicious transactions |
| Reporting | Declaration to Tracfin (French FIU) if suspicion arises |
| Retention | 5 years after the end of the relationship |
7.2 Geographic Restrictions
| Jurisdiction | Access | Reason |
|---|---|---|
| USA | Prohibited (except limited exemptions) | SEC, strict regulation |
| China | Prohibited | National ban |
| Sanctioned countries | Prohibited | OFAC, EU sanctions |
| EU | Permitted | With MiCA KYC |
| Rest of the world | Case by case | Country-by-country analysis |
7.3 Compliance Tools
| Tool | Function |
|---|---|
| Sumsub, Jumio | Automated KYC |
| Chainalysis, Elliptic | Blockchain analysis |
| ComplyAdvantage | Sanctions screening |
| Notabene | Travel Rule compliance |
8. Marketing and Communication
MiCA requires consistency, balance, and transparency in all communications.
8.1 MiCA Communication Rules
| Rule | Requirement |
|---|---|
| Consistency | Marketing consistent with the white paper |
| Balance | Risks must be mentioned |
| Identification | Communication clearly identifiable as marketing |
| No promises | No guarantee of returns |
8.2 Advertising Restrictions
| Channel | France | EU | Best Practices |
|---|---|---|---|
| Social media | Caution required | Variable | Disclaimers, no promises |
| Google Ads | Restricted | Restricted | Strict crypto advertising policy |
| Influencers | Regulated (influencer law) | Variable | Sponsorship transparency |
| GDPR | GDPR | Opt-in, unsubscribe option |
8.3 French Influencer Law (2023)
Since 2023, under the French influencer law, influencers must:
- Clearly indicate commercial partnerships
- Refrain from promoting certain financial products (restrictions apply)
- Face sanctions in case of violation
9. Launchpads and IDOs
Decentralized platforms democratizing access to token fundraising.
9.1 How Launchpads Work
1. Project applies to the launchpad
|
2. Due diligence by the launchpad
|
3. Announcement and marketing
|
4. Registration phase (whitelist)
|
5. Allocation (lottery, FCFS, tiered)
|
6. Sale (smart contract)
|
7. Token distribution + DEX listing
9.2 Major Launchpads
| Launchpad | Blockchain | Required Token | Model |
|---|---|---|---|
| DAO Maker | Multi-chain | DAO | Tiered |
| Seedify | BSC, Multi | SFUND | Tiered |
| Polkastarter | Multi-chain | POLS | Lottery + tiered |
| TrustPad | Multi-chain | TPAD | Tiered |
| Fjord Foundry | Multi-chain | - | LBP |
9.3 Launchpad Regulation
Regulatory grey zone:
- Does the launchpad facilitate a public offering?
- Is it liable for the project?
- Should it be regulated as a financial service provider?
Trend: Regulators are paying increasing attention to launchpads.
9.4 LBP: Liquidity Bootstrapping Pool
Principle:
- Balancer pool with imbalanced weights
- Price starts high and decreases
- Price discovery by the market
Advantages:
- No whitelist/lottery
- Fair pricing (market discovery)
- Discourages bots
Platforms: Balancer, Copper Launch, Fjord Foundry
10. Launch Checklist
A minimum of six months of preparation for a compliant and successful ICO.
Phase 1: Preparation (3-6 months before)
- Define the economic model and token utility
- Draft detailed tokenomics
- Choose the legal structure
- Create the issuing entity
- Engage advisors (lawyer, tax specialist)
- Decide: AMF visa or simple MiCA notification?
Phase 2: Structuring (2-3 months before)
- Draft the white paper (MiCA content requirements)
- Prepare contracts (SAFT if applicable)
- Set up KYC/AML procedures
- Audit smart contracts
- Prepare website and documentation
- Build the community (Discord, Twitter)
Phase 3: Regulatory (1-2 months before)
- Notify the AMF (or other NCA) of the white paper
- Await the objection period (20 days)
- Finalize legal documents
- Verify geographic restrictions
Phase 4: Launch
- Deploy smart contracts
- Open whitelist/registration
- Communicate (social media, PR)
- Execute the sale
- Distribute tokens
- List on DEX/CEX
Phase 5: Post-Launch
- Reporting to investors
- Update white paper if necessary
- Treasury governance
- Project development
- Regulatory monitoring
11. FAQ
Q1: Is the AMF visa required for an ICO in France?
No, it is optional. Since MiCA came into effect, white paper notification is sufficient. The AMF visa provides additional credibility but is not mandatory.
Q2: Can tokens be sold to US investors?
Highly risky. The SEC often considers tokens to be securities. Without SEC registration (which is very expensive), it is better to exclude US residents from the sale.
Q3: How much does an ICO cost?
Variable, but plan for:
- Legal/structuring: EUR30,000 - EUR100,000
- Smart contract audit: EUR10,000 - EUR50,000
- KYC/AML: EUR5,000 - EUR20,000
- Marketing: Variable (EUR50,000+)
- Realistic minimum total: EUR100,000 - EUR200,000
Q4: Are IDOs regulated?
Yes, indirectly. The issuer remains subject to MiCA. The launchpad may also have obligations depending on its role. Decentralization does not exempt from compliance.
Q5: What is the difference between an ICO and an STO?
The type of token. An ICO issues utility tokens (service access). An STO (Security Token Offering) issues security tokens (financial rights) and is subject to full financial regulation (prospectus, authorization, etc.).
Q6: Does the MiCA right of withdrawal apply to IDOs?
In principle, yes. MiCA provides for a 14-day right of withdrawal for retail investors. However, applying this to decentralized IDOs raises unresolved practical questions.
Q7: Can an ICO be conducted anonymously?
Not if you are in the EU. MiCA requires issuer identification. An anonymous ICO from the EU exposes the issuer to sanctions. Conducting one from an offshore jurisdiction is technically possible but risky.
Q8: Are funds raised taxable?
Yes. Funds received in exchange for tokens are generally considered taxable revenue (corporate income tax for a company). Tax structuring is crucial.
Conclusion
Key Takeaways
| Aspect | 2025 Status |
|---|---|
| Legal framework | MiCA + French law |
| White paper | Mandatory, notified |
| AMF visa | Optional but credibility-enhancing |
| Token qualification | Crucial (utility vs security) |
| KYC/AML | Mandatory |
| Marketing | Regulated, caution required |
Recommendations
- Plan ahead: minimum 6 months of preparation
- Qualify your token correctly (avoid security classification)
- Document everything in a MiCA-compliant white paper
- Exclude high-risk jurisdictions (USA)
- Budget properly (EUR100k+ is realistic)
- Surround yourself with professionals (lawyer, auditor, tax advisor)
Related Articles — DAO and Legal Structures
Sources
Regulation
- Regulation (EU) 2023/1114 (MiCA)
- Code monetaire et financier (French Monetary and Financial Code): Articles L.552-1 et seq.
- AMF: ICO and visa doctrine
Practical Guides
- AMF: ICO Guide
- ESMA: Guidelines on MiCA
- ADAN: Recommendations
Article written in December 2025. The information presented is educational and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified professional for your specific situation.